Editorial: Voters deserve say on both icons

Hamilton County Commissioner Chris Monzel is working on a plan that would remove Music Hall, site of last weekend’s Lumenocity events, from the proposed icons sales tax.(Photo: The Enquirer/Carrie Cochran)

Two Hamilton County commissioners' 11th-hour effort to strip the icons tax down to just Union Terminal is wrong-headed and potentially disastrous.

For six weeks the public has had an opportunity to debate and weigh in on the proposal from the blue-chip Cultural Facilities Task Force to renovate Union Terminal and Music Hall. But there's been no input and no chance to vet Commissioner Chris Monzel's yet-unseen alternative.

How long would a Union Terminal tax be for? Would it fully cover all work recommended by engineering and construction experts? How much tax credit money might be lost if the projects are split? What happens to the private money that's been pledged to the joint project? These are just a few questions we don't have answers to, less than 24 hours before the deadline to vote.

This quick attempt to entirely change the icons tax proposal seems likely to result in unintended consequences. It isn't measured governance; it's a knee-jerk reaction to political pressure. It's also a distraction that takes focus away from the proposal commissioners ought to be voting on Wednesday: the plan to fund the renovation of both buildings through a quarter-cent sales tax. That is the plan, imperfect though it is, that's been considered and vetted, and that's the plan commissioners should approve for the November ballot.

There is plenty of blame to go around for the mess that this issue has become.

The task force did a good job evaluating the needs and proposing a quarter-cent sales tax to fund the renovations, but since going public in late June, members have been slow to respond to political realities on the ground. They've taken far too long to provide concrete details on how user fees would contribute to the project, and they've not provided as many details as needed on the buildings' ownership structure and maintenance responsibility going forward.

Hartmann has been rightly accused of moving the goal posts by trying to shift the discussion to Cincinnati's responsibilities instead of addressing the proposal on hand. Anti-tax activists have had unfortunate success in portraying Music Hall as an institution for the rich instead of the community treasure that it is.

There is still time to answer the outstanding questions on the task force's proposal between now and Election Day. Voters need to know whether the Cincinnati Museum Center and the arts organizations that use Music Hall will charge patrons a fee to use the buildings. Such a fee may not change the funding plan much, but it's important symbolically that users are contributing to the effort. We expect task force members to present concrete numbers for user fees as quickly as possible. It would also help the public to know there are specific plans for the entities that will own the buildings and manage the renovations. It's imperative that leaders develop a maintenance plan that will ensure we don't end up in this same mess a few decades from now.

If commissioners vote Wednesday to include both buildings on the November ballot, there is still plenty of work to do before Election Day. And if the task force doesn't adequately answer questions about user fees, ownership and maintenance, voters should reject the proposed tax. But we're unlikely to see this much momentum toward the effort again, and the cost of renovations will continue to rise.